Wider than 90mm w/ movements for 4x5, low light.

[Two23]

I've been happy shooting at night with my Nikon 90mm f4.5, but am reading about these other choices with interest. My night shots mostly use flash, and f4.5 takes a lot less equipment than f8.


Kent in SD

[Kodachrome25]

I just bought a Nikkor 75mm 4.5, 30mm more IC than my 65 Grandagon but still a manageable size & price. The 72 XL would be awesome for the huge coverage but since I rarely use larger than a 90mm as it is, that is a big chunk of change for a lens that will see light duty.

At least with the 75 Nikkor, I can put a center filter on it if need be and still fit my 95mm filters on it with an adapter ring. I have a feeling that for this assignment the lenses I most use will be my 90, 135 and 180. Hopefully the falloff will not be too bad with negative film. Now I can sell my 65 4.5 and center filter.

[EdSawyer]

Sounds like you already figured it out. But in general the 90/4.5 nikkor is not worth bothering with: heavier, not as sharp, huge filter, same coverage, etc. 90/8 Nikkor is the best 90 out there, all things considered, IMNSHO.

[Kodachrome25]

Sounds like you already figured it out. But in general the 90/4.5 nikkor is not worth bothering with: heavier, not as sharp, huge filter, same coverage, etc. 90/8 Nikkor is the best 90 out there, all things considered, IMNSHO.

I would not mind the weight so much since this would be a lens that would be used for urban exterior / interior and not landscapes per se. But...I am also not a fan of one trick ponies and a wider view with some more movement was what I was after anyway so the 75 seems to be the ticket, a bit wider, decent image circle and not too big or expensive.

On the downside, I am not finding any 67mm .45 center filters, just .6 which at -2 stops may be a bit heavy handed. I have a feeling that the falloff on a 75mm 4.5 could be quite pronounced.

[IanG]

I think the 75mm was a good choice, I've had a 75mm f8 Super Angulon for a few years now but never used it for 5x4 it's my standard lens on my 6x17camera.

Like you I do use a 65mm again a slower f8 SA, I have used it underground in a cavern in a manganese mine but I focused it outside in daylight. I now use a 75mm f5.6 Super Angulon for the same reasons you've chosen better movements.

As for Center filters they are becoming hard to find these days, the fall off on a 75mm isn't as bad as a 65mm so less critical except for colour work.

Ian

[Ari]

The 72XL was my favourite for 4x5, and the drop-off in the corners was not too severe.
If you do any post work in Photoshop, there is a centre filter plug-in available from Schneider, or use another digital filter/plug-in.
But it's a great lens that offers lots of room for movements.

[Kodachrome25]

I'll certainly keep an eye out for the right filter ( Rodenstock 170002 ) but my hope is that since this is likely to not be used with lots of blue sky, I may be able to get away with it in B&W.

I'll roll with it and see what happens.

[Michael R]

Also bear in mind for B&W, in the absence of a center filter you can give a little extra exposure (the exposure you'd give with a center filter on) and then compensate for fall-off in printing. Not quite as easy, but doable.

[Kodachrome25]

Also bear in mind for B&W, in the absence of a center filter you can give a little extra exposure (the exposure you'd give with a center filter on) and then compensate for fall-off in printing. Not quite as easy, but doable.

That is what I was thinking, you just dodge the center a bit, correct?

[Michael R]

Burn the center. It would be a progressive burn toward the center, so basically you'd do it with a hole in a burning card which you'd raise/lower gradually during the exposure.

Another option (more work up front but easier later) is to make mask negatives that do the progressive burn for you when printed together with the image negative. Basically the mask negatives look like reverse center filters (ie less density toward the center).

In either case all you're doing is the same thing the center filter does, but during printing instead of during negative exposure. Not as simple as a center filter, but it works - as long as you give the original negative enough exposure (ie essentially the exposure you'd have given with a center filter on).

Just throwing out some B&W options as work-arounds for short focal length falloff in the event you can't get the right center filter, or don't want to spend the $.